Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of claims
The following claims have been rejected or allowed for the following reasons:
Claim(s) 1-16 is rejected under 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 12-14 have been cancelled by the applicant
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2019-185243, filed on 10/08/19.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement/statements (IDS) were filed on 4/7/22, 10/2/23 and 3/14/24. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
mode switching unit – Claims: 1, 10
reception unit – Claims: 1, 10
input unit – Claims: 1, 6, 7, 8, 10, 15
display unit – Claims: 1, 6, 7
control unit – Claims: 10
drive unit – Claims: 10
transmission unit – Claims: 10
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8-10, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Tsubota (US 20180373852 A1), in further view of Sikorski (US 11137757 B2), in further view of Soorianarayanan (US 20140207601 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Tsubota teaches A communication system comprising a robot that is not fixed; and a plurality of computers configured to communicate with the robot, (Tsubota [0019] reads “As illustrated in FIG. 1, the robot control system 10 of the present exemplary embodiment includes a single telepresence robot (remotely operated robot) 20 having plural functions and at least two remote operation terminal devices (a first remote operation terminal device 41 and a second remote operation terminal device 42;”);
wherein the robot includes a camera , (Tsubota [0022] reads “As illustrated in FIG. 2, the telepresence robot 20 includes a control microprocessor 201, a memory 202, a storage device 203, a communication interface 204, a moving device 205, a camera 206, and a sensor 207 which are connected to a control bus 208.”);
based on an external operation or an external command a reception unit that receives a command from an unspecified computer that made a reservation with a reservation period in a time slot for which the first mode is set, (Tsubota [0038] reads “The temporary operation authority permitting unit 228 invalidates the operation authority after the predetermined period of time, thereby prohibiting the remote operation of the specific function. The predetermined period of time may be designated by the remote operator who has the change authority for the specific function in response to the temporary operation permission confirmation request. Alternatively, the predetermined period of time may be registered in advance in the operation authority listing database 229 of the telepresence robot 20.”);
and receives a command from the specific computer during a time slot for which the second mode is set, and at least one of the plurality of computers includes: (Tsubota [0038] reads “When receiving information indicating permission of granting of the temporary operation authority from the remote operation terminal device 40 operated by the remote operator who has the change authority in response to the temporary operation permission confirmation request, the temporary operation authority permitting unit 228 permits the remote operation terminal device 40”);
an input unit that receives an input of a command for the robot, and a display unit that displays an image captured by the camera, (Tsubota [0048] reads “The user interface 404 includes a display device such as a liquid crystal monitor and an input device such as a keyboard, a mouse, a joystick, and a touch pad. The display device displays a login screen when login is performed on the telepresence robot 20, and images around the camera which are captured by the camera of the telepresence robot 20. The input device receives login information when the remote operation terminal device 40 logs in the telepresence robot 20 to be remotely operated. The input device is used to perform the remote operation to move the telepresence robot 20 and control the camera.”);
wherein the reservation from the unspecified computer can be accepted for a time period for which the first mode is scheduled to be set. (Tsubota [0038] reads “The predetermined period of time may be designated by the remote operator who has the change authority for the specific function in response to the temporary operation permission confirmation request. Alternatively, the predetermined period of time may be registered in advance in the operation authority listing database 229 of the telepresence robot 20.”);
Tsubota does not teach a mode switching unit that switches between a first mode of operation based on commands from unspecified computers having no special access right among the plurality of computers and a second mode of operation based on a command from a specific computer having a special access right among the plurality of computers, wherein when a selection of a content is received from the plurality of computers and billing processing for a usage fee for the content is performed, the robot operating in the first mode operates based on a command from a computer that has paid the usage fee, wherein a flat-rate content prepared in advance by the owner of the robot and sales contents for sale on a content platform which include contents created by various users are provided for selection.
Sikorski in analogous art, teaches a mode switching unit that switches between a first mode of operation based on commands from unspecified computers having no special access right among the plurality of computers and a second mode of operation based on a command from a specific computer having a special access right among the plurality of computers, (Sikorski column 1 lines 35-45 reads “The processor is also configured to receive a request for a change to a driving mode and responsive to the request, enable or deny the driving mode based on mode correlation to one of a predefined set of permissible driving modes pre-associated with the driver identity.” And claim 3 reads “The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine the driver identity based on a driver mobile device.” It is obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, that a common method for identifying the driver of a vehicle and someone with special access rights would be through their cellphone or other personal computer.);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Tsubota with that of Sikorski to include a system that would allow the owner special permissions and access rights to a vehicle. This would allow the owner to better control the usage of their vehicle when they are not present. (Sikorski column 1 lines 23-31 reads “In a similar vein, drivers of autonomous or partially autonomous vehicles may wish to switch between automated and manually controlled driving or driving assisted conditions. Skilled drivers may want to freely switch between all possible modes, but at the same time parents or people loaning out vehicles may not want to run the risk of an unskilled or little-known driver using a vehicle in a mode that can be unfavorable to both the occupants and the vehicle when used incorrectly.”);
Tsubota/Sikorski does not teach wherein when a selection of a content is received from the plurality of computers and billing processing for a usage fee for the content is performed, the robot operating in the first mode operates based on a command from a computer that has paid the usage fee, wherein a flat-rate content prepared in advance by the owner of the robot and sales contents for sale on a content platform which include contents created by various users are provided for selection.
Soorianarayanan in analogous art, teaches wherein when a selection of a content is received from the plurality of computers and billing processing for a usage fee for the content is performed, (Soorianarayanan [0081] reads “Accordingly, customers may search for online digital content, using, for example, filtered searches, contextual searches, search-as-you-type, Boolean searches, and so on, to find the digital content 320 provided by the digital stores 326 and/or the other distribution channels. Once desired content 320 is found, the users (e.g., entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, and others) may pay for digital content by using the digital stores 326, with account information managed by the accounting management system 334. Multiple payment options may be supported, including credit cards, debit cards, purchase orders, coupons, bank transfers, and the like.”);
the robot operating in the first mode operates based on a command from a computer that has paid the usage fee, (Soorianarayanan [0072] reads “Application developers 314 include any entity, including but not limited to the aforementioned entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312 that may write digital content 320, including computer executable content 322 (e.g., applications) and/or non-executable content 324 (e.g., equipment manuals, inspection procedures, training procedures, regulatory documents, regulatory procedures, and so on). The digital content may be stored in a repository (e.g., database) included in the NDT ecosystem 300. The applications may include applications executable by the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, the computing system 19, executable in the cloud 24 or a combination thereof. Likewise, non-executable content 324 may be viewable by using the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, and the computing system 19. Accordingly, collaboration by using the NDT ecosystem 300 may involve inception of an idea for the NDT digital content 320, and the creation, distribution, purchase, management and revenue sharing of the NDT digital content 320.”);
wherein a flat-rate content prepared in advance by the owner of the robot (Soorianarayanan [0081] reads “Once desired content 320 is found, the users (e.g., entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, and others) may pay for digital content by using the digital stores 326, with account information managed by the accounting management system 334. Multiple payment options may be supported, including credit cards, debit cards, purchase orders, coupons, bank transfers, and the like. Multiple license types may be supported, including annual licenses that expire once a year, perpetual licenses, monthly licenses, weekly licenses, single use licenses (expire after a single use of the digital content 320 and can be renewed for another use), and so on, by the licensing/asset management system 333, and DRM may be enforced. Multiple seats of the same digital content 320 may also be purchased, suitable for use by more than one user and/or NDT device 12, mobile device 22, and computing device 29.”);
and sales contents for sale on a content platform which include contents created by various users are provided for selection. (Soorianarayanan [0077] reads “As mentioned above, all of the entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, and 314 may create digital content 320. For example, the asset OEM 310 or other parties can publish inspection manuals or solutions through the NDT Application ecosystem 300. Accordingly, the asset owner 302 and/or asset inspection providers 312 may purchase the digital content 320 created by the asset OEM 310, inspection solution provider 304, regulatory entities 306, and/or other entities 308, and “subscribe” to updated content 320, as described in more detail below, to receive updated content 320. The asset inspection providers 312 may create digital content 320, such as inspection-of-assets training content, or may sell inspection services through the digital stores 326. Likewise, application developers 314 may sell a variety of software applications supporting the process 150 or portions of the process 150 and executable by the devices 12, 22, 29. All digital content 320 created by the entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, and 314 may be managed, for example by using a licensing/asset management system 322, to provide for more efficient updates, deployment, and the like, of the digital content 320, and to manage licensing of the content 320, including digital rights management (DRM).“ And [0070] reads “FIG. 8 is illustrative of an embodiment of a NDT ecosystem 300 useful in providing for a collaboratory environment between, for example, between the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, the computing system 29, an asset owner 302, an inspection solution provider 304, regulatory entities 306, other entities 308, an asset original equipment manufacturer (OEM) 310, asset inspection providers 312, and/or application developers 314.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Tsubota/Sikorski with that of Soorianarayanan to include a method that would allow users to buy and sell different digital items related to the equipment that they are operating. This would allow each user to experience and get more out of their current equipment. (Soorianarayanan [0003] reads “In a conventional NDT system, data may be shared with other NDT operators or personnel using portable memory devices, paper, of through the telephone. As such, the amount of time to share data between NDT personnel may depend largely on the speed at which the physical portable memory device is physically dispatched to its target. Accordingly, it would be beneficial to improve the data sharing capabilities of the NDT system, for example, to more efficiently test and inspect a variety of systems and equipment.”);
Regarding claim 3 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches the communication system according to claim 1, wherein, when a selection of a content is received from the plurality of computers and billing processing for a usage fee for the content is performed, (Soorianarayanan [0081] reads “Accordingly, customers may search for online digital content, using, for example, filtered searches, contextual searches, search-as-you-type, Boolean searches, and so on, to find the digital content 320 provided by the digital stores 326 and/or the other distribution channels. Once desired content 320 is found, the users (e.g., entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, and others) may pay for digital content by using the digital stores 326, with account information managed by the accounting management system 334. Multiple payment options may be supported, including credit cards, debit cards, purchase orders, coupons, bank transfers, and the like.”);
the robot operating in the first mode operates based on a command from a computer that has paid the usage fee. (Soorianarayanan [0072] reads “Application developers 314 include any entity, including but not limited to the aforementioned entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312 that may write digital content 320, including computer executable content 322 (e.g., applications) and/or non-executable content 324 (e.g., equipment manuals, inspection procedures, training procedures, regulatory documents, regulatory procedures, and so on). The digital content may be stored in a repository (e.g., database) included in the NDT ecosystem 300. The applications may include applications executable by the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, the computing system 19, executable in the cloud 24 or a combination thereof. Likewise, non-executable content 324 may be viewable by using the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, and the computing system 19. Accordingly, collaboration by using the NDT ecosystem 300 may involve inception of an idea for the NDT digital content 320, and the creation, distribution, purchase, management and revenue sharing of the NDT digital content 320.” Furthermore this limitation fails to further limit the scope of the current invention and thus will also be rejected as such.);
Regarding claim 4 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 3, wherein the content is a content prepared in advance by an owner of the robot. (Soorianarayanan [0081] reads “Once desired content 320 is found, the users (e.g., entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, and others) may pay for digital content by using the digital stores 326, with account information managed by the accounting management system 334. Multiple payment options may be supported, including credit cards, debit cards, purchase orders, coupons, bank transfers, and the like. Multiple license types may be supported, including annual licenses that expire once a year, perpetual licenses, monthly licenses, weekly licenses, single use licenses (expire after a single use of the digital content 320 and can be renewed for another use), and so on, by the licensing/asset management system 333, and DRM may be enforced. Multiple seats of the same digital content 320 may also be purchased, suitable for use by more than one user and/or NDT device 12, mobile device 22, and computing device 29.” Furthermore this limitation fails to further limit the scope of the current invention and thus will also be rejected as such.);
Regarding claim 5 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 3, wherein the content is a content for sale on a content platform. (Soorianarayanan [0077] reads “As mentioned above, all of the entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, and 314 may create digital content 320. For example, the asset OEM 310 or other parties can publish inspection manuals or solutions through the NDT Application ecosystem 300. Accordingly, the asset owner 302 and/or asset inspection providers 312 may purchase the digital content 320 created by the asset OEM 310, inspection solution provider 304, regulatory entities 306, and/or other entities 308, and “subscribe” to updated content 320, as described in more detail below, to receive updated content 320. The asset inspection providers 312 may create digital content 320, such as inspection-of-assets training content, or may sell inspection services through the digital stores 326. Likewise, application developers 314 may sell a variety of software applications supporting the process 150 or portions of process 150 and executable by the devices 12, 22, 29. All digital content 320 created by the entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, and 314 may be managed, for example by using a licensing/asset management system 322, to provide for more efficient updates, deployment, and the like, of the digital content 320, and to manage licensing of the content 320, including digital rights management (DRM).“ And [0070] reads “FIG. 8 is illustrative of an embodiment of a NDT ecosystem 300 useful in providing for a collaboratory environment between, for example, between the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, the computing system 29, an asset owner 302, an inspection solution provider 304, regulatory entities 306, other entities 308, an asset original equipment manufacturer (OEM) 310, asset inspection providers 312, and/or application developers 314.”);
Regarding claim 8 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 1 wherein switching between the first mode and the second mode is based on a user operation on a switch or an input unit provided in the robot. (Sikorski column 8 lines 25-39 reads “If there is no mandated mode, but the user selects one of the enabled modes (selection of non-enabled or disabled modes being prevented), the process may receive 611 the change-mode instruction and ensure that the mode is permitted 613 for the user.” And column 2 lines 48-62 reads “The processor is also provided with a number of different inputs allowing the user to interface with the processor. In this illustrative embodiment, a microphone 29, an auxiliary input 25 (for input 33), a USB input 23, a GPS input 24, screen 4, which may be a touchscreen display, and a BLUETOOTH input 15 are all provided. An input selector 51 is also provided, to allow a user to swap between various inputs.”);
Regarding claim 9 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 1 wherein switching between the first mode and the second mode is based on a command from the specific computer. (Sikorski column 5 lines 33-44 reads “In a similar sense, further examples allow owners to “force” or “block” certain modes based on environmental conditions, road conditions and other external considerations. For example, even though it may be less fuel efficient, an owner can force a vehicle into “snow” mode when ice or freezing temperatures are present, thus ensuring that certain drivers are driving in an environmentally appropriate mode.” And claim 3 reads “The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine the driver identity based on a driver mobile device.” It is obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, that a common method for identifying the driver of a vehicle and someone with special access rights would be through their cellphone or other personal computer.);
Regarding claim 10 Tsubota teaches A robot of mobile type or wearable type, comprising a camera and a remotely operable drive unit, wherein the robot comprising: (Tsubota [0022] reads “As illustrated in FIG. 2, the telepresence robot 20 includes a control microprocessor 201, a memory 202, a storage device 203, a communication interface 204, a moving device 205, a camera 206, and a sensor 207 which are connected to a control bus 208.”);
a reception unit that receives a command from an unspecified computer that made a reservation with a reservation period in a time slot for which when the first mode is set, (Tsubota [0038] reads “The temporary operation authority permitting unit 228 invalidates the operation authority after the predetermined period of time, thereby prohibiting the remote operation of the specific function. The predetermined period of time may be designated by the remote operator who has the change authority for the specific function in response to the temporary operation permission confirmation request. Alternatively, the predetermined period of time may be registered in advance in the operation authority listing database 229 of the telepresence robot 20.”);
and receives a command from the specific computer having a special access right among the plurality of computers during a time slot for which when the second mode is set; (Tsubota [0038] reads “When receiving information indicating permission of granting of the temporary operation authority from the remote operation terminal device 40 operated by the remote operator who has the change authority in response to the temporary operation permission confirmation request, the temporary operation authority permitting unit 228 permits the remote operation terminal device 40”);
wherein the reservation from the unspecified computer can be accepted for a time period for which the first mode is scheduled to be set. (Tsubota [0038] reads “The predetermined period of time may be designated by the remote operator who has the change authority for the specific function in response to the temporary operation permission confirmation request. Alternatively, the predetermined period of time may be registered in advance in the operation authority listing database 229 of the telepresence robot 20.”);
Tsubota does not teach a mode switching unit that switches between a first mode of operation based on commands from unspecified computers having no special access right among a plurality of computers and a second mode of operation based on a command from a specific computer having a special access right among the plurality of computers, based on an external operation or an external command; a control unit that controls the drive unit in response to the received command; and a transmission unit that transmits an image acquired by the camera to the computer from which the command is input.
Sikorski in analogous art, teaches a mode switching unit that switches between a first mode of operation based on commands from unspecified computers having no special access right among a plurality of computers and a second mode of operation based on a command from a specific computer having a special access right among the plurality of computers, based on an external operation or an external command; (Sikorski column 1 lines 35-45 reads “The processor is also configured to receive a request for a change to a driving mode and responsive to the request, enable or deny the driving mode based on mode correlation to one of a predefined set of permissible driving modes pre-associated with the driver identity.” And claim 3 reads “The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine the driver identity based on a driver mobile device.” It is obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, that a common method for identifying the driver of a vehicle and someone with special access rights would be through their cellphone or other personal computer.);
a control unit that controls the drive unit in response to the received command; and a transmission unit that transmits an image acquired by the camera to the computer from which the command is input, (Sikorski column 1 lines 35-45 reads “The processor is also configured to receive a request for a change to a driving mode and responsive to the request, enable or deny the driving mode based on mode correlation to one of a predefined set of permissible driving modes pre-associated with the driver identity.” And column 6 lines 5-25 reads “The process also determines 203 if there is a “mode profile” for the identified driver. That is, individual drivers or classes of driver may have owner-designated control and mode selection rights associated therewith.” And “If there is no profile for a certain user (or if identification attempts result in an unknown user), the process may use 205 a default profile. The default profile can be customized to enable/disable certain driving modes, or may, for example, correspond to a specific profile having the lowest permission settings.” Sikorski has also taught that the drivers identity can be gathered from a personal computer of that person. From this it would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to understand that this art teaches that a default profile may exist that can be access from any unregistered computer and that certain registered computers may grant the user additional features or operational modes.);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Tsubota with that of Sikorski to include a system that would allow the owner special permissions and access rights to a vehicle. This would allow the owner to better control the usage of their vehicle when they are not present. (Sikorski column 1 lines 23-31 reads “In a similar vein, drivers of autonomous or partially autonomous vehicles may wish to switch between automated and manually controlled driving or driving assisted conditions. Skilled drivers may want to freely switch between all possible modes, but at the same time parents or people loaning out vehicles may not want to run the risk of an unskilled or little-known driver using a vehicle in a mode that can be unfavorable to both the occupants and the vehicle when used incorrectly.”);
Tsubota/Sikorski does not teach wherein when a selection of a content is received from the plurality of computers and billing processing for a usage fee for the content is performed, the robot operating in the first mode operates based on a command from a computer that has paid the usage fee, wherein a flat-rate content prepared in advance by the owner of the robot and sales contents for sale on a content platform which include contents created by various users are provided for selection.
Soorianarayanan in analogous art, teaches wherein when a selection of a content is received from the plurality of computers and billing processing for a usage fee for the content is performed, (Soorianarayanan [0081] reads “Accordingly, customers may search for online digital content, using, for example, filtered searches, contextual searches, search-as-you-type, Boolean searches, and so on, to find the digital content 320 provided by the digital stores 326 and/or the other distribution channels. Once desired content 320 is found, the users (e.g., entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, and others) may pay for digital content by using the digital stores 326, with account information managed by the accounting management system 334. Multiple payment options may be supported, including credit cards, debit cards, purchase orders, coupons, bank transfers, and the like.”);
the robot operating in the first mode operates based on a command from a computer that has paid the usage fee, (Soorianarayanan [0072] reads “Application developers 314 include any entity, including but not limited to the aforementioned entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312 that may write digital content 320, including computer executable content 322 (e.g., applications) and/or non-executable content 324 (e.g., equipment manuals, inspection procedures, training procedures, regulatory documents, regulatory procedures, and so on). The digital content may be stored in a repository (e.g., database) included in the NDT ecosystem 300. The applications may include applications executable by the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, the computing system 19, executable in the cloud 24 or a combination thereof. Likewise, non-executable content 324 may be viewable by using the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, and the computing system 19. Accordingly, collaboration by using the NDT ecosystem 300 may involve inception of an idea for the NDT digital content 320, and the creation, distribution, purchase, management and revenue sharing of the NDT digital content 320.”);
wherein a flat-rate content prepared in advance by the owner of the robot (Soorianarayanan [0081] reads “Once desired content 320 is found, the users (e.g., entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, and others) may pay for digital content by using the digital stores 326, with account information managed by the accounting management system 334. Multiple payment options may be supported, including credit cards, debit cards, purchase orders, coupons, bank transfers, and the like. Multiple license types may be supported, including annual licenses that expire once a year, perpetual licenses, monthly licenses, weekly licenses, single use licenses (expire after a single use of the digital content 320 and can be renewed for another use), and so on, by the licensing/asset management system 333, and DRM may be enforced. Multiple seats of the same digital content 320 may also be purchased, suitable for use by more than one user and/or NDT device 12, mobile device 22, and computing device 29.”);
and sales contents for sale on a content platform which include contents created by various users are provided for selection. (Soorianarayanan [0077] reads “As mentioned above, all of the entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, and 314 may create digital content 320. For example, the asset OEM 310 or other parties can publish inspection manuals or solutions through the NDT Application ecosystem 300. Accordingly, the asset owner 302 and/or asset inspection providers 312 may purchase the digital content 320 created by the asset OEM 310, inspection solution provider 304, regulatory entities 306, and/or other entities 308, and “subscribe” to updated content 320, as described in more detail below, to receive updated content 320. The asset inspection providers 312 may create digital content 320, such as inspection-of-assets training content, or may sell inspection services through the digital stores 326. Likewise, application developers 314 may sell a variety of software applications supporting the process 150 or portions of the process 150 and executable by the devices 12, 22, 29. All digital content 320 created by the entities 302, 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, and 314 may be managed, for example by using a licensing/asset management system 322, to provide for more efficient updates, deployment, and the like, of the digital content 320, and to manage licensing of the content 320, including digital rights management (DRM).“ And [0070] reads “FIG. 8 is illustrative of an embodiment of a NDT ecosystem 300 useful in providing for a collaboratory environment between, for example, between the NDT device 12, the mobile device 22, the computing system 29, an asset owner 302, an inspection solution provider 304, regulatory entities 306, other entities 308, an asset original equipment manufacturer (OEM) 310, asset inspection providers 312, and/or application developers 314.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Tsubota/Sikorski with that of Soorianarayanan to include a method that would allow users to buy and sell different digital items related to the equipment that they are operating. This would allow each user to experience and get more out of their current equipment. (Soorianarayanan [0003] reads “In a conventional NDT system, data may be shared with other NDT operators or personnel using portable memory devices, paper, of through the telephone. As such, the amount of time to share data between NDT personnel may depend largely on the speed at which the physical portable memory device is physically dispatched to its target. Accordingly, it would be beneficial to improve the data sharing capabilities of the NDT system, for example, to more efficiently test and inspect a variety of systems and equipment.”);
Regarding claim 15 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The robot according to claim 10, wherein switching between the first mode and the second mode is based on a user operation on a switch or an input unit provided in the robot. (Sikorski column 1 lines 23-31 reads “In a similar vein, drivers of autonomous or partially autonomous vehicles may wish to switch between automated and manually controlled driving or driving assisted conditions. Skilled drivers may want to freely switch between all possible modes, but at the same time parents or people loaning out vehicles may not want to run the risk of an unskilled or little-known driver using a vehicle in a mode that can be unfavorable to both the occupants and the vehicle when used incorrectly.” And column 1 lines 35-45 reads “The processor is also configured to receive a request for a change to a driving mode and responsive to the request, enable or deny the driving mode based on mode correlation to one of a predefined set of permissible driving modes pre-associated with the driver identity.”);
Regarding claim 16 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The robot according to claim 10, wherein switching between the first mode and the second mode is based on a command from the specific computer for which a user has been authenticated. (Sikorski column 1 lines 35-45 reads “The processor is also configured to receive a request for a change to a driving mode and responsive to the request, enable or deny the driving mode based on mode correlation to one of a predefined set of permissible driving modes pre-associated with the driver identity.” And claim 3 reads “The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine the driver identity based on a driver mobile device.” And column 6 lines 5-25 reads “The process also determines 203 if there is a “mode profile” for the identified driver. That is, individual drivers or classes of driver may have owner-designated control and mode selection rights associated therewith.” And “If there is no profile for a certain user (or if identification attempts result in an unknown user), the process may use 205 a default profile. The default profile can be customized to enable/disable certain driving modes, or may, for example, correspond to a specific profile having the lowest permission settings.” Sikorski has also taught that the drivers identity can be gathered from a personal computer of that person. From this it would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to understand that this art teaches that a default profile may exist that can be access from any unregistered computer and that certain registered computers may grant the user additional features or operational modes. It is obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, that a common method for identifying the driver of a vehicle and someone with special access rights would be through their cellphone or other personal computer.);
Claim(s) 2-5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan, in further view of Suzuki (JP 2002101333 A).
Regarding claim 2 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 1.
Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan does not teach, wherein, when an advance reservation is received from the plurality of computers, the robot operating in the first mode operates during a reserved period based on a command from the computer that has made the advance reservation.
Suzuki in analogous art, teaches wherein, when an advance reservation is received from the plurality of computers, the robot operating in the first mode operates during a reserved period based on a command from the computer that has made the advance reservation. (Suzuki page 2 paragraph 4 reads “At the same time, rather than letting some users monopolize the remote operation of the drive unit, many users who want to operate it simply reserve an operation for a time contract and anyone can easily operate within the contract time. Can be remotely controlled, and For a service provider that plans and provides such remote control, even if the cost is enormous, it can be easily realized if there is a number of reservations commensurate with it, and the burden on the user is also reduced.”. This prior art further explains the usage of a reservation system for multiple robotic vehicles that are placed in various locations.);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan with that of Suzuki to include a method for allowing the reservation of the computer robotic systems. This would allow multiple users to control the same mobile robot that may be placed in extreme locations. Similarly, it would allow multiple users to control the same robot, which would then increase they value and productivity. (Suzuki page 2 paragraph 5-6 reads “A first object of the present invention is to control a driving device such as a robot installed in a special place such as the universe or the deep sea by remote control by a user even in a special place. At the same time, rather than letting some users monopolize the remote operation of the drive unit, many users who want to operate it simply reserve an operation for a time contract and anyone can easily operate within the contract time” and A second object of the present invention is to allow a user to remotely control a driving device such as a robot installed in a special place such as the universe or the deep sea from a user terminal such as a home. Remote control while watching the video of the site enables a simulated experience as if you are at the place, and also allows some users to monopolize the remote control of the drive device rather than, Anyone can easily enjoy remote operation within the contract time from a user terminal at home or the like at a low cost simply by making a time contract operation reservation for a large number of users who desire the operation”.);
Regarding claim 11 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The robot according to claim 10.
Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan does not teach wherein, when an advance reservation is received from the plurality of computers without user authentication, the robot operating in the first mode operates during a reserved period based on a command from the computer that has made the advance reservation.
Suzuki in analogous art, teaches wherein, when an advance reservation is received from the plurality of computers without user authentication, the robot operating in the first mode operates during a reserved period based on a command from the computer that has made the advance reservation. (Suzuki page 2 paragraph 4 reads “At the same time, rather than letting some users monopolize the remote operation of the drive unit, many users who want to operate it simply reserve an operation for a time contract and anyone can easily operate within the contract time. Can be remotely controlled, and For a service provider that plans and provides such remote control, even if the cost is enormous, it can be easily realized if there is a number of reservations commensurate with it, and the burden on the user is also reduced.”. This prior art further explains the usage of a reservation system for multiple robotic vehicles that are placed in various locations.);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan with that of Suzuki to include a method for allowing the reservation of the computer robotic systems. This would allow multiple users to control the same mobile robot that may be placed in extreme locations. Similarly, it would allow multiple users to control the same robot, which would then increase they value and productivity. (Suzuki page 2 paragraph 5-6 reads “A first object of the present invention is to control a driving device such as a robot installed in a special place such as the universe or the deep sea by remote control by a user even in a special place. At the same time, rather than letting some users monopolize the remote operation of the drive unit, many users who want to operate it simply reserve an operation for a time contract and anyone can easily operate within the contract time” and A second object of the present invention is to allow a user to remotely control a driving device such as a robot installed in a special place such as the universe or the deep sea from a user terminal such as a home. Remote control while watching the video of the site enables a simulated experience as if you are at the place, and also allows some users to monopolize the remote control of the drive device rather than, Anyone can easily enjoy remote operation within the contract time from a user terminal at home or the like at a low cost simply by making a time contract operation reservation for a large number of users who desire the operation”.);
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over as applied to Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan, in further view of Clark (US 20110213629 A1).
Regarding claim 6 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 1.
Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan does not teach wherein a plurality of robots is provided, the display unit displays a list of the robots operating in the first mode among the plurality of robots, and the input unit receives a selection of one of the robots operating in the first mode and receives an input of a command for the selected robot.
Clark in analogous art, teaches wherein a plurality of robots is provided, the display unit displays a list of the robots operating in the first mode among the plurality of robots, (Clark [0113] reads “In typical car sharing systems, a borrower views a list of vehicles that are available for sharing (rent) at times they need to run errands, for example, and may reserve a car many days or weeks in advance.” And [0042] reads “The system can display to the borrower available cars in a variety of ways, such as listing the available cars closest to the borrower's home address first. Alternatively or additionally, the listing can show the available cars that are closest to the borrower's current location, for example, if the borrower is using a smart phone or other mobile computing device that can provide current location information.” It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, that displaying the current usage state of a vehicle would be analogous to displaying the mode that a robot is operating in. For example usage mode 1 could be mapped to a vehicle that has not yet been reserved while usage mode 2 could be mapped to a vehicle that has an upcoming reservation.);
and the input unit receives a selection of one of the robots operating in the first mode and receives an input of a command for the selected robot. (Clark [0042] reads “Once a borrower is approved (which can be done by a representative of the host or manager behind the scenes, with the result being indicated to the user by an email or some indication on the website), the borrower can reserve a car on the online site.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan with that of Clark to include a method that would allow for the owner or operator to keep track of the operating mode of each of their robots. This would allow the system to be more user friendly and improve the cost effectiveness of the system. (Clark [0156]-[0157] reads “Also, although much of the earlier discussion assumes that users who become participants already own cars for personal use, which are then shared, it would also be possible for users to buy cars for the specific purpose of sharing them within the system. In a densely populated area, a used car might be bought and shared at a profit to the owner.”);
Regarding claim 7 Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan teaches The communication system according to claim 1.
Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan does not teach wherein a plurality of robots is provided, the display unit displays a list of the robots operating in the first mode among the plurality of robots and the robots operating in the second mode for which a user has been authenticated among the plurality of robots, and the input unit receives a selection of either one of the robots operating in the first mode or one of the robots operating in the second mode and receives an input of a command for the selected robot.
Clark in analogous art, teaches wherein a plurality of robots is provided, the display unit displays a list of the robots operating in the first mode among the plurality of robots and the robots operating in the second mode for which a user has been authenticated among the plurality of robots, (Clark [0113] reads “In typical car sharing systems, a borrower views a list of vehicles that are available for sharing (rent) at times they need to run errands, for example, and may reserve a car many days or weeks in advance.” And [0042] reads “The system can display to the borrower available cars in a variety of ways, such as listing the available cars closest to the borrower's home address first. Alternatively or additionally, the listing can show the available cars that are closest to the borrower's current location, for example, if the borrower is using a smart phone or other mobile computing device that can provide current location information.” It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, that displaying the current usage state of a vehicle would be analogous to displaying the mode that a robot is operating in. For example usage mode 1 could be mapped to a vehicle that has not yet been reserved while usage mode 2 could be mapped to a vehicle that has an upcoming reservation);
and the input unit receives a selection of either one of the robots operating in the first mode or one of the robots operating in the second mode and receives an input of a command for the selected robot. (Clark [0042] reads “Once a borrower is approved (which can be done by a representative of the host or manager behind the scenes, with the result being indicated to the user by an email or some indication on the website), the borrower can reserve a car on the online site.”);
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Tsubota/Sikorski/Soorianarayanan with that of Clark to include a method that would allow for the owner or operator to keep track of the operating mode of each of their robots. This would allow the system to be more user friendly and improve the cost effectiveness of the system. (Clark [0156]-[0157] reads “Also, although much of the earlier discussion assumes that users who become participants already own cars for personal use, which are then shared, it would also be possible for users to buy cars for the specific purpose of sharing them within the system. In a densely populated area, a used car might be bought and shared at a profit to the owner.”);
Other references not Cited
Throughout examination other references were found that could read onto the prior art. Though these references were not used in this examination they could be used in future examination and could read on the contents of the current disclosure. These references are, Koo (US 20190129445 A1); Hanes (US 20180152909 A1); Walton (US 9305407 B1); Kim (JP 2009034807 A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues < While Tsubota teaches a telepresence robot system with operation authority management and temporary operation authority granting, it does not disclose any content selection system, billing processing for content usage fees, or a content platform where various users can create and sell contents.> [Page 7 first paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in the current office action of record Tsubota is not relied upon to teach any form of content sharing platform that would include any form of payment. Soorianarayanan, in analogous art, is relied upon to teach these limitations. Soorianarayanan teaches a sales platform in which a variety of different users can create distribute and share a variety of different forms of content relating to different types of machinery. (Soorianarayanan abstract reads “A non-transitory computer readable medium may include executable instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to provide for a non-destructive testing (NDT) ecosystem. The NDT ecosystem includes a repository of digital content, and a store configured to sell the digital content to a customer, wherein the digital content is executable by a NDT device and wherein the digital content is created by a plurality of entities.”); Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Applicant argues < Sikorski teaches a vehicle driving mode system where different driving modes can be enabled or disabled based on driver identity and profiles, but does not disclose any content prepared by owners, content platforms, or sales contents created by various users. > [Page 7 first paragraph]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in the current office action of record Tsubota is not relied upon to teach any form of content sharing platform that would include any form of payment. Soorianarayanan, in analogous art, is relied upon to teach these limitations. Soorianarayanan teaches a sales platform in which a variety of different users can create distribute and share a variety of different forms of content relating to different types of machinery. (Soorianarayanan abstract reads “A non-transitory computer readable medium may include executable instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to provide for a non-destructive testing (NDT) ecosystem. The NDT ecosystem includes a repository of digital content, and a store configured to sell the digital content to a customer, wherein the digital content is executable by a NDT device and wherein the digital content is created by a plurality of entities.”); Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6228. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 am - 5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramon Mercado can be reached at (571) 270 - 5744. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN MARTIN O'MALLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
/Ramon A. Mercado/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3658